![]() Researchers may also use a variety of methods to assess and report dietary behaviors.Īnother key challenge in nutrition research is measuring the effects of specific foods and nutrients in context of the rest of the diet. In observational studies, populations range widely in their dietary habits-and reporting on those habits-making it difficult to quantify consumption of many foods and nutrients. For example, unlike drug trials where interventions are often comparable, nutrition intervention trials regularly differ in methodology. The result of having too many differences in a meta-analysis is a wider variation in the findings, which can skew the conclusion or dilute an otherwise significant finding.Īccording to the authors, applying meta-analysis to nutritional sciences adds a unique set of challenges. Another problem is selection bias, that is, if certain studies are intentionally omitted (or included) in the analysis, which can easily veer its conclusion in a certain direction. In general, problems arise with meta-analyses when there is too much variation in the studies included: different types of studies, different study methods, different samples of people. “However, because of their power to drive public policy, there are often perverse incentives to distort meta-analysis methods to bias their conclusions.”įeigl-Ding and colleagues at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health and George Washington University explored the misuse of meta-analysis in nutrition research in the September 2017 issue of JAMA, reviewing an array of challenges when combining multiple studies-and discussing the impacts when the results are the product of faulty methods. Department of Agriculture guidelines, to global health economic burden forecasts from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,” said Harvard Chan epidemiologist Dr. “Meta-analyses have emerged as among the most influential types of research in the biomedical literature, directly influencing healthcare guidelines and international policies, from National Academy of Medicine and U.S. ![]() A 2007 review of over 100 industry-funded studies found that the funding source was significantly related to study conclusions. Recognizing the power of science-driven headlines, the food industry has also invested in meta-analyses. ![]() Still, flawed meta-analyses in nutritional science have increasingly made headlines by producing seemingly definitive summaries on popular topics stirring-up controversies on types of dietary fat and heart disease and the relationship of excess weight and the risk of premature death, among others. At worst, it can be a mish-mash of findings from studies that differ significantly, essentially comparing apples with oranges that offer meaningless-or even misleading-conclusions. At best, a meta-analysis can be a useful summary of a large pool of data if high-quality studies with similar groups of people and study methods are used. This ‘study-of-studies’ design is called a meta-analysis, which combines the findings from several single studies to increase the sample size and statistical power. But what approach do you take when the study itself, by design, supposedly factors-in the existing evidence? ![]() If you’re a savvy consumer of nutrition news, you may have become wise to look past the catchy headlines to assess the quality of the study being reported-sizing-up the latest finding in context of existing evidence on the topic. Nutrition is a complex field regularly cursed with provocative media headlines that often preface an oversimplified summary. Meta-analyses in nutrition research: sources of insight or confusion? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |